Gerry Horkan (Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I thank Senators Higgins and Ruane for introducing this Bill. I am happy to tell them that Fianna Fáil is happy to support it through to Committee Stage. That is not to say that it is perfect as it is - we all acknowledge that it is a work in progress - but the idea of examining public procurement and public authorities and utilities under the contract preparation and award criteria is a very timely topic to be discussing in the context of issues such as the national children's hospital. I do not want to be party political about it, but we are all wondering how an initial figure of €650 million seems likely to rise to €2 billion. Equally, the national broadband plan for rural areas, which is the scheme the State has been promising since 2012 or 2013 and which intends to deliver to areas that do not have high-speed broadband, is associated with high costs. There are implications around how we will deal with that. This is not just about the cheapest way to do things. We need a quality product. Technology is changing by the week or month in terms of what can be delivered and how it can be delivered, and there are questions as to whether we should use fibre optics or wireless systems or alternatives. These things are all very important.

We probably all know the adage that if something is too cheap to be true, it probably is not true. The saying "buy cheap and buy twice" is equally true. I have often seen scenarios where people have been presented with a list of contractors for a school building project, for example, or any kind of commercial contract, having been told that they must select the contractor offering the work at the lowest price. They end up praying that particular contractors do not come in with the lowest price, because they know that particular contractors have a history of coming in low, finding fault with everything, making many changes to the plans, and then charging enormous prices. They end up being thankful that particular contractors do not get the tender or feeling that they are in trouble because the contractor did get it because, although they tendered at the lowest price, it is well known that it will require far more management and attention to ensure that problems do not arise and costs do not escalate. There are many reputable contractors, but they are not all as good as each other. There are those which are better and there are those which have a bad track record of delivering the projects they promised to deliver. There is certainly merit in looking at a system which does not say that the lowest tender always has to be accepted, regardless of who the contractor is or their track record. There is scope to change that. Perhaps, as the Bill is teased out, there are ways in which we can deal with that.

We have the Government Procurement Office, and it is the case that many areas, including the 400 voluntary secondary schools, have schools procurement units which advise schools on how best to procure things, such as negotiating with the ESB or for gas or any other items schools require. If a security alarm contract or a burglar alarm contract can be negotiated, there are savings that can be made. Nobody has to pay over the odds.

CervicalCheck was mentioned by a number of people as an example of another scandal. I am not sure that this Bill would automatically solve the problems that arose around CervicalCheck, but it is certainly timely in that it looks at how we procure and how we look at the initial tender. We faced issues about mobile phone licences years ago and the weighting that went to various things. People were on the committee that decided how those weightings would be allocated. Almost by default, once a level of subjectivity is introduced, we enter an area that can possibly be manipulated. It can be coerced in a particular way to favour one person or another, and I do not know if that can be legislated for. It is something we need to be careful of. As Senator Higgins develops her Bill, we must ensure that there is a significant level of transparency involved. People may not like the CAO system, but at least it is transparent. Once interviews are brought into processes, it becomes likely that people will meet others that they know directly or through other people. It will all be transparent, but there will be a level of subjectivity involved. Sometimes it is useful, but problems arise over how the process is handled, the personnel on the board, who selects the tender and whether they have any conflicts of interest. All of those points have to be considered.

Relevant points were made about Carillion and Western Building Systems. Both companies appeared before the Joint Committee on Finance, Public Expenditure and Reform, and Taoiseach to discuss the collapse of Carillion. We heard how contracts are awarded and how the main contractor gets the work. I know many people who have done work for the State having got the job as a subcontractor to a main contractor. The main contractor was paid by the State, but the subcontractors got treated very badly in some cases by that main contractor. I know some of these people, and they are very good business people who were very good at the work they did. These people thought they were doing work for the State, whether for the Garda or the courts system, but they were caught out because the main contractor and subcontractor fell out, leaving the subcontractor in a very difficult position. The main contractor benefited from that difficulty. All of those things must be looked at when we are dealing with State money. It is not fair that anybody who does the job they signed up to do does not get paid. Equally, it is not fair if people do not do the job they are being paid for.

This is useful legislation. I have a couple of concerns that the Minister of State may be able to address when he makes his contribution. It may not be possible to allow a money Bill to be introduced by someone who is not a member of Government. I will be interested to see if the Minister of State considers that this is legislation that will require a money message at some point. If it does and it is not going to get one, this could be the most wonderful idea but it will go nowhere. I hope that is not the case, but perhaps the Minister of State could address that.

In terms of procurement and contracts generally, whether broadband or the national children's hospital, there is a need to shine a light on how this is done. I do not want to repeat the valuable contributions made by Senators Higgins and Ruane, who covered many of the points I might have made were I introducing the Bill. I wish it well on Committee Stage. We have concerns but we are happy to tease it out further on the next Stage. I congratulate the Senators and their group for introducing the matter.